[REMINDER] use fields rewrite
Jarkko Hietaniemi
rewriting the fields pragma (since we promised that would stay).
At least in the past the plan was to use the readonly hashes.
--
Jarkko Hietaniemi <j...@iki.fi> http://www.iki.fi/jhi/ "There is this special
biologist word we use for 'stable'. It is 'dead'." -- Jack Cohen
Rafael Garcia-Suarez
> Since pseudo-hashes are going to be gone in 5.10, someone should start
> rewriting the fields pragma (since we promised that would stay).
> At least in the past the plan was to use the readonly hashes.
What needs to be done exactly ? Michael already did some work on fields.pm.
Reminds me. There are still 5005-threads fossils in bleadperl. What was the
plan exactly ? Complete and total extermination ? rm -rf {ext,lib}/Thread ?
Jarkko Hietaniemi
> Jarkko Hietaniemi <j...@iki.fi> wrote:
> > Since pseudo-hashes are going to be gone in 5.10, someone should start
> > rewriting the fields pragma (since we promised that would stay).
> > At least in the past the plan was to use the readonly hashes.
>
> What needs to be done exactly ? Michael already did some work on fields.pm.
Make certain that the whole public API of the fields pragma still works
as documented (check both the fields.pm pod and the Camel book).
> Reminds me. There are still 5005-threads fossils in bleadperl. What was the
> plan exactly ? Complete and total extermination ? rm -rf {ext,lib}/Thread ?
In bleadperl, yes. Well, depends on your definition of "complete and
total" :-) Namely: unless we do a lot of metaconfig surgery, some
traces will remain in Configure (some metaconfig units would need to
split in two, or something messy like that), since the metaconfig
units are shared between 5.8 and 5.9. But at the file/directory
level, sure, let the carnage begin.
H.Merijn Brand
There was some respons, but not much.
On Thu 24 Oct 2002 09:59, "H.Merijn Brand" <h.m....@hccnet.nl> wrote in
<20021024094747...@hccnet.nl>:
> On Mon 21 Oct 2002 22:24, Rafael Garcia-Suarez <rgarci...@free.fr> wrote:
> > charnames patch follow-up
> > H.Merijn Brand submitted a new version of his patch that enhances the
> > "charnames" pragma to allow user-defined aliases. Not yet applied. Your
> > summarizer noticed that loading the files that define the aliases via
> > require() instead of do() would be an improvement, but unfortunately it
> > appeared that require() is always forced to be called in scalar context,
> > (for an unclear reason), which makes this solution not applicable.
> >
> > http://archive.develooper.com/perl5-...@perl.org/msg88068.html
> > http://archive.develooper.com/perl5-...@perl.org/msg88177.html
>
> With two appovals, no (negative) critiques, and no more complaints from Hugo,
> expect an applied path today or tomorrow.
>
> > H.Merijn Brand applied his chainsaw-patch to remove the old
> > 5005-threads. Further reviewing and adjustments are probably needed (but
> > apparently no regression was introduced.)
>
> What regression tests should there be?
>
> Can *you* please remove ext/Thread/thr5005.t from the repository? It has
> already been removed from the MANIFEST. We still have smoke reporting
>
> MANIFEST did not declare ext/Thread/thr5005.t
>
> As for all, here's the points of attention list once more. Please *anyone* who
> can narrow these down, stand up.
>
> DEBUG_S vs. DEBUG_s has also been discussed in
> http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/perl5-porters/2002-10/msg00567.html
>
> Jarkko already replied for Tru64 and Irix
>
> = This is a literal copy of
> http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/cgi-bin/w3glimpse2html/perl5-porters/2002-10/msg00173.html?50#mfs
> = so the line numbers are probably out of sync by now!
>
> Remarks/Questions (line numbers based on modified versions, but can still be
> inaccurate due to sequential edits)
>
> Removal in Configure will be a seperate task (maybe take 2)
>
> - ext/B/B.xs now leaves an empty sub threadsv_names. Remove?
>
> 625 void
> 626 threadsv_names()
> 627 PPCODE:
>
> - ext/B/B/Deparse.pm should be updated seperately for the docs?
>
> - ext/Thread/Thread.xs leaves a lot of empty subs. There might be a more
> insightful cleanup needed over there
>
> - I /think/ the comment on line 87 of intrp.h can just go, but I'm not sure
>
> /* this one needs to be moved to thrdvar.h and accessed via
> * find_threadsv() when USE_5005THREADS */
> PERLVAR(Ireplgv, GV *)
>
> - perl.c #124 dTHX; is in between USE_5005THREADS. is this correct?
> - perl.c #308 same
>
> - perl.h #1954 How valid is the rest of this comment
> - perl.h #2524 leaves empty define for DEBUG_S, but it is still used
>
> ext/Thread/Thread.xs: DEBUG_S(PerlIO_printf(Perl_debug_log,
> ext/Thread/Thread.xs: DEBUG_S(PerlIO_printf(Perl_debug_log,
> ext/Thread/typemap: DEBUG_S(PerlIO_printf(Perl_debug_log,
> perl.c: DEBUG_S(PerlIO_printf(Perl_debug_log, "main thread is 0x%"UVxf"\n",
> perl.c: DEBUG_S(PerlIO_printf(Perl_debug_log, "my_exit: thread %p, status %lu\n",
> perl.h:#define DEBUG_S_FLAG 0x00010000 /* 65536 */
> perl.h:# define DEBUG_S_TEST_ (PL_debug & DEBUG_S_FLAG)
> perl.h:# define DEBUG_S_TEST DEBUG_S_TEST_
> perl.h:# define DEBUG_S(a)
> perl.h:# define DEBUG_S_TEST (0)
> perl.h:# define DEBUG_S(a)
> pp_hot.c: DEBUG_S(PerlIO_printf(Perl_debug_log,
> pp_hot.c: DEBUG_S(PerlIO_printf(Perl_debug_log,
> scope.c: DEBUG_S(PerlIO_printf(Perl_debug_log,
> util.c: DEBUG_S(PerlIO_printf(Perl_debug_log,
> util.c: DEBUG_S(PerlIO_printf(Perl_debug_log,
> util.c: DEBUG_S(PerlIO_printf(Perl_debug_log,
> util.c: DEBUG_S(PerlIO_printf(Perl_debug_log, "croak: 0x%"UVxf" %s",
>
>
> - Someone with better understanding should modify pod/perlguts.pod. If I just
> strip the 5005 issues, I might introduce ambiguities
> - Same for INSTALL
> - Same for pod/perlthrtut.pod
>
> - pp_ctl.c #769 Comment should go?
>
> SAVETMPS;
> /* SAVE_DEFSV does *not* suffice here for USE_5005THREADS */
> SAVESPTR(DEFSV);
> ENTER; /* enter inner scope */
> SAVEVPTR(PL_curpm);
>
> - pp_ctl.c #2631 Any implications of these comments?
>
> - pp_hot.c #1795 Comment still applicable?
>
> - regexec.c #2057 What about this comment?
>
> - thrdvar.h #21 Comment confuses me. please look into this
>
> - vms/genconfig.pl #160 Have a second look
> - same for configure.com
>
> - t/op/nothr5005.t should IMHO now be merged into a test that does not refer
> to 5005 threads
>
> - README.irix should be verified if all comments are still valid if 5.005
> threads are gone
> - same for README.tru64
>
> - ext/B/t/debug.t #52 defines is_thread only based on use5005threads. I don't
> dare touch this
> - ext/B/t/showlex.t #30 same
>
> - ext/Safe/safe2.t #66 Safe to remove the condition?
>
> - lib/Thread.pm needs a shakedown. Removal ain't that hard, but it's the docs
> again
>
> Side notes:
>
> - win32/Makefile still takes perlio in the archname. Now that perlio is
> default and non-perlio is very likely to be unsupported/depricated, this is
> not the most logical way
> - win32/makefile.mk same story
--
H.Merijn Brand Amsterdam Perl Mongers (http://amsterdam.pm.org/)
using perl-5.6.1, 5.8.0 & 633 on HP-UX 10.20 & 11.00, AIX 4.2, AIX 4.3,
WinNT 4, Win2K pro & WinCE 2.11. Smoking perl CORE: smo...@perl.org
http://archives.develooper.com/daily...@perl.org/ per...@perl.org
send smoke reports to: smokers...@perl.org, QA: http://qa.perl.org